Created issue 'Does 'backgound-repeat: round' shrink or stretch images?' nickname stretch vs shrink owned by Bert Bos on product CSS3 Backgrounds and Borders, description 'The current draft says that 'background-repeat: round' shrinks images, if needed, so that exactly a whole number of images tiles the background. If a background image is almost as wide as the element, say 99%, that means it gets scaled down by almost 50% to make room for a second image. Should the image instead be scaled up by 1% in such a case?
Counter argument: it's rare that images are scaled down by much, because 'round' is typically used when the author expects more than two tiles; and scaling up usually makes for uglier results than scaling down.' non-public/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/20#2008-04-04T15:34:37Z2008-04-04T15:34:37ZBert Bos

2008-04-04 15:34:37: Created issue 'Does 'backgound-repeat: round' shrink or stretch images?' nickname stretch vs shrink owned by Bert Bos on product CSS3 Backgrounds and Borders, description 'The current draft says that 'background-repeat: round' shrinks images, if needed, so that exactly a whole number of images tiles the background. If a background image is almost as wide as the element, say 99%, that means it gets scaled down by almost 50% to make room for a second image. Should the image instead be scaled up by 1% in such a case?

Counter argument: it's rare that images are scaled down by much, because 'round' is typically used when the author expects more than two tiles; and scaling up usually makes for uglier results than scaling down.' non-public [Bert Bos]